Sunday, February 5, 2017

Three-dimensional #20: The man on the Shroud: The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic!

The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic!
The man on the Shroud
THREE-DIMENSIONAL #20
Copyright © Stephen E. Jones[1]

This is part #20, "The man on the Shroud: Three-dimensional," of my series, "The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic!" For more information about this series, see the "Main index #1" and "The man on the Shroud #8." As previously stated, the order of topics in this "The man on the Shroud," section is from what a person looking at the Shroud would notice first, e.g. the man is naked, through to what is less obvious, e.g. his image is a photographic negative. Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated. Any further updates to this post will be in the background and notified in the "Editorial and Contents" of my Shroud of Turin News.

[Main index #1] [Previous: Negative #19] [Next: No decomposition #21]


  1. The man on the Shroud #8
    1. Three-dimensional #20

Introduction. The image of the man on the Shroud is three-dimensional[2].

[Above (enlarge):

"The Shroud image's three-dimensional characteristics, as revealed by the VP-8 Image Analyzer in February 1976. Here the face and body appear in sculpted relief, framed by the two lines of scorches from the chapel fire of 1672"[3].
Note that the scorches from the 1672 fire also appear three-dimensional but that is because the VP-8 automatically converts lighter shades as vertically higher, irrespective of whether they are in reality. So that (for example) the white squares on a chessboard falsely appear higher (see below). As can be seen on Enrie's 1931 negative, a copy of which was processed in 1976 by the VP-8, the scorches and patches from the 1672 fire are in negative reality almost flat. They are therefore meaningless and so falsely, three-dimensional under a VP-8, but the Shroud image is meaningful (i.e. consistent with a real human body), and therefore truly, three-dimensional in reality. All other photographs of persons processed by the VP-8 appear distorted and therefore falsely three-dimensional. See the photographs of Pope Pius XI below.

Frontal image only is three-dimensional However, to clarify, only the frontal image of the Shroud man is three-dimensional[4]. The dorsal or back image is not three-dimensional[5], having been formed by direct contact[6]. The frontal image cannot have been formed by direct contact because it has areas that could not have been in contact with the cloth[7]: for example the recessed areas between the nose and cheeks, the eye sockets and ears, the ribs and part of the neck[8]. This is consistent with STURP's John P. Jackson's "cloth collapse theory" (see below ).

Paul Vignon In 1902 French biologist Paul Vignon (1865-1943) observed that the intensity of the image on the Shroud varied inversely with the distance between the cloth and the body[9]:

"Some emanation from the body has acted on the linen, and since the hollows on the Shroud are less vigorously reproduced than the raised portions it must be admitted that this something worked with less intensity in proportion as the distance from the body increased ... In the present case ... the main point is that we can assert that the action diminished in proportion as the distance of the body from the Shroud increased ... Thus it is that before making any detailed examination we are able to assert that ... the raised parts of the body are reproduced strongly while the hollows have given fainter impressions in proportion to their distance from the cloth."[10]
That is, the nearer the body part was to the cloth, the darker its image appears[11]

Leo Vala In 1967, Leo Vala, a professional photographer and an agnostic[12] made the first three-dimensional reproduction of the Shroud face by projecting a Shroud negative photograph onto a lump of clay and sculpting it[13]. Vala published his experiment in the March 8,

[Above (enlarge): "British photographer Leo Vala displays the photographic representation he has produced of the face of Christ. He used a unique process to develop the Turin Shroud's imprint into a three-dimensional picture. (Photo by Douglas Miller/Keystone/Getty Images). 23rd January 1967"[14].]

1967 issue of Amateur Photographer, stating in the article:

"I've been involved in the invention of many complicated visual processes, and I can tell you that no one could have faked that image. No one could do it today with all the technology we have. It's a perfect negative. It has a photographic quality that is extremely precise."[15]
Vala became a critic of anyone who thought the image could have been produced by human hands[16].

Barbara M. Sullivan In a 1973 National Review article, "mother of six" Barbara M. Sullivan (1933-2016), with tracing paper and a Shroud photograph was the first to provide evidence that the whole Shroud image was three-dimensional[17]. The late Alan D. Adler (1931-2000) credited Sullivan with having provided "the first evidence for encoded 3-D information in the Shroud images":
"It should be noted that the first evidence for encoded 3-D information in the Shroud images was worked out using sheets of tracing paper"[18]
Eighteen years later Sullivan attempted to present her presumably completed tracings at the 1991 St. Louis Shroud Symposium but due to inexperience her presentation was not successful[19].

Paul Gastineau In 1974 French engineer Paul Gastineau, at the

[Above (enlarge): "Three-dimensional reproduction of the Face, which is more akin to the bas-relief than photography. It was a Frenchman, Paul GASTINEAU, who realized it, by a process of his invention, in April 1974."[20]:

"The three-dimensional figures obtained by Drs. Jackson and Jumper [see below] and Prof. Tamburelli (see below) are images in perspective on a screen. My experiment is different in that I obtain directly a tangible relief, a sort of sculpture. The analysis of the image and the production of the sculpture are simultaneous. By means of an optic system, a luminous ray explores a photograph of the Shroud line by line. The reflection of the luminous ray on the photo is captured by photo-sensitive cells, which electronically work a signal creating, in an apparatus of permanent magnets, an electro-propelling-force. The EPF is variable in function of the variation of luminous intensities captured by the cells; or, in other words, in function of the `values' (from the brightest to the darkest) of the photograph of the Shroud. The EPF activates a mechanical system equipped with a stylus which is moved vertically, up and down. To each line of the photo explored by the cells, the stylus simultaneously cuts a corresponding groove in a matrix of a soft translucent material. When the cells capture a value more or less bright, the stylus descends more or less deep, making the corresponding groove at that place. The result is a negative bas-relief ... A supple plastic mold is then turned into the negative, and thus we obtain the `tangible' 3D image of the Holy Face. Jackson and Jumper have demonstrated that on the VP8 analyzer [see below], a normal photograph gives a distorted image. Likewise, if I place a normal photo on my machine, I obtain an image completely deformed by cast shadows."[21]
Note that Gastineau's photomechanical method of obtaining a 3-D image from a photograph of the Shroud face was two years before and completely different from the VP-8 Image Analyzer method (see above and below), yet it produced the same result. Which can only mean that the Shroud man's image really does contain three-dimensional information! Also note the small round object over each eye (see below).]

request of his friend, veteran sindonologist Antoine Legrand (1904-2002), invented a machine which produced:"... by photomechanical means, a bas-relief sculpture based on the information encoded in the Shroud image"[22]. This "astonishing 3-dimensional photo of the Shroud Face made by Paul Gastineau (France) in April 1974, [was] three [sic two] years before STURP [sic] independently accomplished their now-famous 3-D rendition"[23].

Correlation between image intensity and cloth-body distance In 1974 John P. Jackson a physicist, and Eric Jumper an engineer, were stationed at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, New Mexico[24]. They were investigating in their spare time Vignon's observation (see above) that the darkness, or intensity, of each part of the Shroud man's image varies in direct proportion to how far that part of the body would have been from the cloth that had covered it[25]. Using a microdensitometer they plotted along the Shroud's ridge line, the body's highest point of contact with the Shroud[26], the relationship

[Above (enlarge): The correlation between image intensity and cloth-body distance along the ridge line of the Shroud[27].]

between image intensity and the distance between the cloth and the body[28]. They found that there was a definite correlation between image intensity and cloth-body distance (see Fig. 3)[29].

VP-8 Image Analyzer In 1976 Robert William (Bill) Mottern (1924-2015), an image-enhancement specialist at Sandia Laboratories in Albuquerque, offered Jackson the use of an Interpretation Systems VP-8 Image Analyzer, an instrument which translates light intensity into vertical relief[30], to help in their investigations[31]. Mottern was using the VP8 to analyze x-rays in his work at Sandia Laboratories[32].

[Above (enlarge): Chessboard demonstration that the VP-8 Image Analyzer automatically displays lighter shades as vertically higher and darker shades as lower, even when the object is not three-dimensional[33].]

When a negative transparency of a Shroud photograph provided by Jackson[34] was processed by the VP-8, they were amazed that on the VP-8's computer screen they saw a correctly-proportioned, three-dimensional image of the Shroud man (see above)[35]. Being a transparency, Mottern was able to rotate the image and view it from the side and back[36]. This proved that the Shroud image contains three-dimensional information[37], since ordinary photographs processed by the VP-8

[Above (enlarge)[38]: "Ordinary photographs of persons transformed into vertical relief showed obvious distortion; noses were pushed into faces, arms into chests, and entire reliefs appeared flat and unnatural. See Figures 6 and 7 [Pope Pius XI]. ... Compare the flattened nose, contorted mouth and deeply depressed eyes to the correctly defined image in Figure 8 (see above) [39].]

appear distorted because they contain only light, not distance, information[40] (see above photograph of Pope Pius XI). A separate photograph of the face (see below) was later processed by the VP-8 and it also showed the same three-dimensional relief effect[41]. That face photograph also confirmed the presence of unnatural bulges over the

[Above (enlarge)[42]: Separate photograph of the Shroud face as processed by the VP-8 Image Analyzer. Note again the small round objects over the eyes (see below).

eyes, which they later proposed were coins placed over the eyes (see below) to keep the eyelids closed[43]. From the VP-8 three-dimensional relief information, Jackson and others were able to construct a three-dimensional model of the Shroud image[44] (right). Their work

[Right (enlarge)[45]: Three-dimensional cardboard and fibreglass statue of the Shroud image based on vertical relief information provided by the VP-8 Image Analyzer.]

attracted the attention of other scientists and led to the formation in 1977 of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP)[46].

Single global mapping function Based on the VP-8 information, Jackson and William R. Ercoline found that a drape of a Shroud-sized cloth over a Shroud man-sized human body could be expressed mathematically as, "a single global mapping function":

"But as Dr. Jackson demonstrated,the Shroud image is three-dimensionally `consistent with a body shape covered with a naturally draping cloth and which can be derived from a single, global mapping function relating image shading with distance between these two surfaces"[47] (see below).

[Above enlarge: "Correlation of image intensity on the Turin Shroud with the 3-D structure of a human body shape."[48]

"... the frontal image on the Shroud of Turin is shown to be consistent with a naturally draping cloth in the sense that image shading can be derived from a single global mapping function of distance between these two surfaces..."[49]

Computer enhancement In 1978, Prof. Giovanni Tamburelli (1923-1990) of the University of Turin, after seeing Jackson, et al.'s VP-8 Image Analyzer three-dimensional Shroud images from poor-quality photographs of the Shroud, commenced his own computer processing of higher quality Shroud photographs[50].

[Above (enlarge): Three-dimensional image of the Shroud man's face computer-enhanced by Prof. Tamburelli from a negative Enrie 1931 Shroud photograph (left) and the same image of the face after removal by Prof. Tamburelli of the wounds by information processing techniques (right)[51].]

Tamburelli's completely different method (that makes three-see above) independently confirmed the VP-8 results that the Shroud image contains three-dimensional distance information[52]. Tamburelli's own independent computer processing of the three-dimensional information contained in the Shroud's image found that there was a "circular mark on the right eyelid probably left by a coin"[53] (see below). However, Tamburelli was unable to determine whether the object over the left eye was a coin[54]. After Prof. Tamburelli's death in 1990 his work has been continued by a University of Turin team supervised by Prof. Nello Balossino[55].

Coins over the eyes As previously mentioned, two different methods, Gastineau's and the VP-8 Image Analyzer revealed the presence of small, round, three-dimensional objects over each eye of the man on the Shroud. A third different method, Tamburelli's, confirmed the presence of a "circular mark ... probably ... a coin" over the right eye. In Jackson's own words, when in 1976 he and Jumper processed through the VP-8 Image Analyzer a negative photograph of the Shroud face (see above), they noticed:

"...something unexpected - over each eye appeared objects resembling small buttons. Though it seemed natural on the basis of the computer generated picture to interpret these features as objects resting atop closed eyelids, we felt compelled to consider several alternative explanations ... we were left with but one conclusion - that the buttonlike features are what they seem to be, namely solid objects resting upon the eyelids. This identification agrees with ancient Jewish burial custom where objects (potsherd fragments or coins) were apparently sometimes placed over the eyes." (emphasis original)[56].
Jackson, et al. then proposed that the objects were coins:
"... we propose that they may be some kind of coins since: (1) they are both nearly circular and approximately the same size, and (2) scriptural accounts indicate that Joseph of Arimathaea, a wealthy man, was responsible for burying Jesus. [Mt 27:57] He obviously had money on his person at the time of Jesus' burial for he was able to purchase a linen burial cloth. [Mk 15:46] Thus, if Joseph followed Jewish burial custom to cover the eyes, then it is not unreasonable that the most natural and convenient thing for him to use would have been coins rather than pottery fragments."[57]
After consulting with historian Ian Wilson who was at the same 1977 Shroud conference in Albuquerque, Jackson, et al. proposed that the three-dimensional "objects resembling small buttons" which were "over each eye" of the Shroud, likely were "a Lepton of Pontius Pilate coined in A.D. 30-31":
"If our conjecture is true that these images are of coins, then we may have a truly unique method of dating the image. Computer enhancement of high quality closeup photographs of the eye region followed by a statistical correlation with known coinage of a given era and locality may be able to: (1) identify the objects as coins and (2) date and locate the probable time and place the image and not just the cloth was formed. Indeed, we have some computer enhancements which, though lacking sufficient resolution for positive identification, indicate a possible structure on the surface of the objects. In addition, Ian Wilson has suggested several Judean Bronze Lepton coins which are about the correct size as the buttonlike images. In particular, a Lepton of Pontius Pilate coined in A.D. 30-31 seems to agree especially well ... According to Wilson, a Lepton would probably be a likely candidate for Joseph of Arimathaea, an orthodox Jew, to use since it was acceptable as a Temple offering.[Mk 12:41-44; Lk 21:1-4]"[58]
The thickness of these objects was later determined to be about 1 to 5 mm, and they were circular disks, about the same size with a diameter of approximately 14 mm[59]. Pontius Pilate leptons, the "widows mite" of Mk 12:42 & Lk 21:2 KJV[60], had diameters of between 15-17 mm[61]. Since first century Jewish burials allowed either pieces of pottery or coins to be placed over the eyelids of their dead[62], it is much more likely these two tiny circular disks over the eyes of the man on the Shroud are coins[63], and if so they are Pontius Pilate lepton coins which were the only coins of that tiny size ever minted[64].

It is beyond the scope of this "Three-dimensional" post to comment on the further identification by Fr. Francis L. Filas (1915-85) of part of the inscriptions and designs on these coins over the eyes of the Shroud man, as indeed leptons struck by Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea from AD 26–36, who sentenced Jesus to death by crucifixion (Mt 27:24-31; Mk 15:15-20; Lk 23:25-26; Jn 19:12-16). I will cover this in "3. Other images and marks on the Shroud." But until then see my post of 10May13. Those who deny that evidence of part-inscriptions and designs on these disks over the eyes of the man on the Shroud, should at least acknowledge from the above evidence that they are disks, and from their tiny size and shape they are most likely to be Pontius Pilate leptons!

Test of image formation theories The VP-8 Image Analyzer has been used to test proposed Shroud image formation mechanisms[65]. Numerous artistic techniques, including painting, bas relief[66], dry powder[67], scorching, the vaporograph theory[68] and the medieval photography theory[69] have been so tested by the VP-8 and have all have failed to meet this criterion[70].

Cloth collapse theory In 1990, Jackson proposed his "cloth collapse theory"[71]:

"... in the case of the Shroud image, the cloth did collapse into and through the underlying body structure ... The concept of a cloth falling into the underlying body region and receiving an image, in essence, requires that two separate assumptions be made. First, we must assume that the body became mechanically `transparent' to its physical surroundings and, second, that a stimulus was generated that recorded the passage of the cloth through the body region onto the cloth as an image. With regard to the latter assumption, it is unclear in an a priori sense what to assume for the physical nature of the stimulus. However, we at least know that it was able to interact physically with cloth; otherwise, image discolorations would not have been formed. I propose that, as the Shroud collapsed through the underlying body, radiation emitted from all points within that body discolored the cloth so as to produce the observed image"[72]
Jackson proposed that the radiation was "in the ultraviolet or soft x-ray region" because it is "sufficiently energetic to photochemically modify cellulose" yet is "absorbed strongly in air"[73].

Again it is beyond the scope of this "three-dimensional" post to cover Jackson's entire theory. Except to point out that it is an explicit prediction (i.e. retrodiction) of Jackson's theory that "the frontal image is ... `three-dimensional'" but "the dorsal image is ... one of `direct contact'":

"Additional Predictions of the Theory ... 1. Intensity Structure of the Frontal and Dorsal Images. While the frontal image is predicted to be `three-dimensional', the dorsal image is predicted to be one of `direct contact'. The reason for the difference is that the top part of the Shroud falls dynamically through the body region while the lower part remains statically in place. This means that image intensity should be generated on the lower part of the Shroud only where hard body contact with the cloth occurs, owing to the strong attenuation in air of the emitted radiation from the body"[74]
Which is the case (see above and below left).

[Left (enlarge)[75]: As can be seen, the dorsal image is not three-dimensional, being the result of hard direct contact of upper back, buttocks, calves and heels, with those areas not in hard direct contact: between calves and heels, knees, small of back and neck, having a fainter image due to the ultraviolet radiation dose received having been attenuated by air (see above). Compared with the equivalent frontal image, it can be seen that this dorsal image is much fainter, despite it having had hard direct contact with the body. This can only mean that a different process created the frontal image.]

That the dorsal image is not three-dimensional is also evident from this comparison VP-8 photograph (below) of the frontal (left) and the dorsal (right) images.

[Above (enlarge): VP-8 Image Analyzer views of the frontal image (left) and the dorsal image (right). As can be seen, the frontal image is three-dimensional and readily recognisable as a human body whereas the dorsal image is flat and featureless, including even the buttocks, and is not readily recognisable as a human body. This confirms the prediction of Jackson's theory (above) that the frontal image will be three-dimensional because:

"[The] ... cloth-covered body ... became mechanically transparent to its physical surroundings and, as it did so, emitted radiation from all points within and on the surface of the body ... As the top part of the Shroud fell into the mechanically transparent body, the radiation began to interact with the cloth so as to produce a time integrated record of the cloth's passage through the body region"[76]
but the dorsal image would not be three-dimensional because that half of the cloth remained static under the body and so did not receive the imprint of that "time integrated record."]

Problem for the forgery theory (see previous three: #17, #18) & #19. No medieval artist would have been able to encode three-dimensional information into the Shroud, almost a century before the recognition of perspective and its incorporation into painted images[77]. Even after perspective had been discovered, Renaissance and modern masters had tried to copy the Shroud, but their photographs in the VP-8 are "dimensional disasters"[78]. Jackson, et al, asked police artist to copy the Shroud but the results in the VP-8 were contorted[79]. They then had the police artists draw the VP-8 images but again their copies were aberrant[80]. As mentioned above all attempts to replicate the Shroud naturally have failed to pass the VP-8 three-dimensionality test. This includes Shroud sceptic Joe Nickell's powdered bas-relief which was designed to create a three-dimensional image on cloth, but failed the VP-8 test[81]. The producer of the VP-8, Peter M. Schumacher, asks how could and why would an artist/forger "embed three-dimensional information in the gray shading of an image" with "no means of viewing this property ... for at least 650 years" afterwards:

"If one considers the Shroud image to be `a work of art' of some type, then one must consider how and why an artist would embed three-dimensional information in the gray shading of an image. In fact, no means of viewing this property of the image would be available for at least 650 years after it was done. One would have to ask, (assuming this is a `natural result' in some style or type of art), `Why isn't this result obtained in the analysis of other works?' Or, if this is a unique work, `Why would the artist make only one such work requiring such special skills and talent, and not pass the technique along to others?' How could the artist control the quality of the work when the artist could not `see' gray scale as elevation? Did the artist predict the outcome before the outcome could be defined? Would an artist produce this work before the device to show the results was invented?"[82]
It therefore is an effective impossibility for a medieval artist/forger to have created the Shroud man's image with three-dimensional qualities (in negative), based on the distances between each point on the front of the body and its covering the cloth[83]. The three-dimensional qualities of the Shroud's frontal image support the theory that the image was not man-made, that is it occurred by either a natural (which no one to my knowledge argues for) or a supernatural process[84]!

Resurrection Jackson, to be rigorously scientific, did not offer the resurrection of Jesus as an explanation of how a dead man's body lying in a tomb covered by a linen Shroud, as Jesus' body was (Mt 27:59-60; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53), suddenly "became mechanically `transparent' to its physical surroundings" and "emitted radiation"[85]. But the gospels record that Jesus' resurrected body could become "mechanically `transparent' to its physical surroundings" in the sense of suddenly appearing inside a locked room (Lk 24:36; Jn 20:19,26)[86], and the Apostle Paul wrote that in Jesus' resurrection His body instantly changed state from "perishable" to "imperishable" (1Cor 15:50-53; Php 3:21)[87]. As Ian Wilson in typical British understatement wrote:

"Dr John Jackson has elaborately theorized that the Shroud's image was formed when the cloth collapsed through a body that became `mechanically transparent', arguably in the course of the resurrection of Jesus described in the Christian gospels ..."[88]
The normally cautious STURP chemist Ray Rogers (1927–2005) was forced by this and other evidence to conclude that, "the image [on the Shroud] was formed by a burst of radiant energy — light ... such as Christ might have produced at the moment of resurrection":
"I am forced to conclude that the image [on the Shroud] was formed by a burst of radiant energy — light, if you will. I think there is no question about that. What better way, if you were a deity, of regenerating faith in a skeptical age, than to leave evidence 2,000 years ago that could be defined only by the technology available in that skeptical age. The one possible alternative is that the images were created by a burst of radiant light, such as Christ might have produced at the moment of resurrection"[89].
Also Jesus' live body "emitted radiation," namely light, at the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-13; Mk 9:2-13; Lk 9:28-36), where His "face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light" (Mt 17:2); "his clothes became radiant, intensely white, as no one on earth could bleach them" (Mk 9:3); "the appearance of his face was altered, and his clothing became dazzling white" (Lk 9:29). And the Transfiguration was "a preview of the glorified body of Christ following his Resurrection"[90]. It is the view of many (if not most) Shroud scholars, including Ian Wilson, Rex Morgan, John Iannone, Mark Oxley, August Accetta and Giulio Fanti that the image on the Shroud is Jesus' imprinted on the cloth by the light of His resurrection[91].

It is also supported by the findings of scientists working under the auspices of Italy's ENEA agency, that the closest approximation yet to the colour, extreme superficiality, and other characteristics of the Shroud man's image, was obtained using an excimer laser delivering "a short and intense burst of VUV [vacuum ultraviolet] directional radiation"[92]. But the only `problem' with that is, "to instantly color the surface of linen that corresponds to a human of average height," would require "a total power of VUV radiation" of "34 thousand billion watts![93].

As the German physicist Oswald Scheuermann, concluded:

"It seems as if physics and chemistry [would have] provided better explanations of the formation of the image nowadays ... and yet, the genuine arrangement of simultaneous and successive causal steps that formed this expressive and informative image cannot be attributed to a series of coincidences. Neither was it possible for human beings to produce such an image ... Consequently, one cannot help reaching the following conclusion: A Dead Man Rose from the Dead and Left Behind His Image as an Evidence for Posterity"[94]!
Continued in part #21 of this series.

Notes
1. This post is copyright. Permission is granted to quote from any part of this post (but not the whole post), provided it includes a reference citing my name, its subject heading, its date and a hyperlink back to this post. [return]
2. Jackson, J.P., 1977, "A Problem of Resolution Posed by the Existence of a Three Dimensional Image on the Shroud," in Stevenson, K.E., ed., "Proceedings of the 1977 United States Conference of Research on The Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Bronx NY, pp.223-233, 223; Clark, K.R., 1988, "Seeking a Truer Picture of the Shroud," Chicago Tribune, April 3; Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, pp.38-39; Newcombe, J., 2012 , "Is There Scientific Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ?," The Christian Post, April 4. [return]
3. Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London, p.82I. [return]
4. Schwalbe, L.A. & Rogers, R.N., 1982, "Physics and Chemistry of the Shroud of Turin: Summary of the 1978 Investigation," Reprinted from Analytica Chimica Acta, Vol. 135, No. 1, pp.3-49, Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co: Amsterdam, 1982, pp.7-8, 44; Bennett, J., 2001, "Sacred Blood, Sacred Image: The Sudarium of Oviedo: New Evidence for the Authenticity of the Shroud of Turin," Ignatius Press: San Francisco CA, p.167; Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK, p.241. [return]
5. Schwalbe & Rogers, 1982, p.8; Bennett, 2001, p.167; Oxley, 2010, p.241. [return]
6. Schwalbe & Rogers, 1982, p.35; Jackson, J.P., 1991, "An Unconventional Hypothesis to Explain all Image Characteristics Found on the Shroud Image," in Berard, A., ed., 1991, "History, Science, Theology and the Shroud," Symposium Proceedings, St. Louis Missouri, June 22-23, The Man in the Shroud Committee of Amarillo, Texas: Amarillo TX, 1991, pp.340-341. [return]
7. Carter, G.F., 1982, "Formation of the Image on the Shroud of Turin by x-Rays: A New Hypothesis," in Lambert, J.B., ed., 1984, "Archaeological Chemistry III: ACS Advances in Chemistry, No. 205," American Chemical Society, Washington D.C., pp.425-446, 429. [return]
8. Heller, 1983, p.210; Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, p.125; Ruffin, C.B., 1999, "The Shroud of Turin: The Most Up-To-Date Analysis of All the Facts Regarding the Church's Controversial Relic," Our Sunday Visitor: Huntington IN, p.78; Whiting, B., 2006, "The Shroud Story," Harbour Publishing: Strathfield NSW, Australia, p.95; Fanti, G. & Malfi, P., 2015, "The Shroud of Turin: First Century after Christ!," Pan Stanford: Singapore, p.27. [return]
9. Jackson, J.P., Jumper, E.J., Mottern, R.W. & Stevenson, K.E., ed., 1977, "The Three Dimensional Image on Jesus' Burial Cloth," in Stevenson, 1977, pp.74-94, 74; Culliton, B.J., 1978, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin Challenges 20th-Century Science," Science, Vol. 201, 21 July, pp.235-239; Morgan, R., 1980, "Perpetual Miracle: Secrets of the Holy Shroud of Turin by an Eye Witness," Runciman Press: Manly NSW, Australia, p.71; Schwalbe & Rogers, 1982, p.7; Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, p.218; Balossino, N., "Computer Processing of the Body Image," in Scannerini, S. & Savarino, P., eds, 2000, "The Turin Shroud: Past, Present and Future," International scientific symposium, Turin, 2-5 March 2000," Effatà:Cantalupa, pp.116-117; Tribbe, F.C., 2006, "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," [1983], Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, p.122; Oxley, 2010, pp.202-203. [return]
10. Vignon, P., 1902, "The Shroud of Christ," University Books: New York NY, Reprinted, 1970, pp.136-137. [return]
11. Antonacci, 2000, p.39; Balossino, 2000, p.117. [return]
12. Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, p.19; Wilson, 2010, p.21. [return]
13. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, pp.34-35; Morgan, 1980, pp.128-129; Tribbe, 2006, p.254. [return]
14. "Simply Some Photos," Avax News, 1 October 2011. [return]
15. Vala, L., 1967, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Amateur Photographer, March 8, pp.332-335, in Wilcox, R.K., 1977, "Shroud," Macmillan: New York NY, pp.130-131 & Wilson, 2010, p.21. [return]
16. Wilcox, 1977, pp.130-131. [return]
17. Sullivan, B.M., 1973, "Reading the Shroud of Turin: How in fact was Jesus Christ laid in his tomb?," National Review, July 20, Reprinted March 24, 2005. [return]
18. Adler, A.D., 2000a, "The Shroud Fabric and the Body Image: Chemical and Physical Characteristics," in Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., 2002, "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," Effatà Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy, pp.113-127, 117, 127n.31. [return]
19. Morgan, R.H., 1991, "The St Louis Shroud of Turin Symposium: History, Science, Theology and the Shroud Report by Rex Morgan," Shroud News, No 67, October, pp.3-19, 8,11 (not yet online). [return]
20. "Le plus vieux negatif photographique," Fetes et Saisons, "Le Linceul de Turin," No. 372, February 1983. ("The oldest photographic negative," Festivities and Seasons, "The Shroud of Turin.") French translation by Google Translate. See also Gastineau, P., 1986, "A Bas relief from a Photograph of the Holy Face," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 18, March, pp.2-6, 2. [return]
21. Gastineau, 1986, p.3. [return]
22. Morgan, R.H., 1989, "The Paris Symposium - Part I of Report by Rex Morgan," Shroud News, No. 55, October 1989, pp.5-23, 17. [return]
23. Crispino, D.C., 1983, "Recently Published: A Bishop Writes (France)," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 9, December, pp.27-34, 28. [return]
24. Adams, F.O., 1982, "Sindon: A Layman's Guide to the Shroud of Turin," Synergy Books: Tempe AZ, pp.92-93. [return]
25. Adams, 1982, p.93; Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, p.47. [return]
26. Jackson, et al., 1977, p.77 [return]
27. Jackson, et al., 1977, p.77 [return]
28. Jackson, et al., 1977, p.77 [return]
29. Jackson, et al., 1977, p.77 [return]
30. Wilson, 1979, p.229; Morgan, R.H., 1980, "Perpetual Miracle: Secrets of the Holy Shroud of Turin by an Eye Witness," Runciman Press: Manly NSW, Australia, p.132; Meacham, W., 1983, "The Authentication of the Turin Shroud: An Issue in Archaeological Epistemology," Current Anthropology, Vol. 24, No. 3, June, pp.283-311, 288; Wilson, 1986, p.47; Wilson, 1998, p.28; Adler, A.D., 2000c, "Chemical and Physical Aspects of the Sindonic Images," in Adler & Crispino, 2002, pp.11-27, 18; Wilson, 2010, p.21. [return]
31. Adams, 1982, p.93; Heller, J.H., 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," Houghton Mifflin Co: Boston MA, p.39; Wilson, 1986, p.47; de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.101. [return]
32. Schwortz, B., 2015, "In Memoriam: Robert William (Bill) Mottern 1924-2015," 2015 Website News, Shroud.com, 1 November. [return]
33. Weiss, A. & Schumacher, P., 2016, "SEAM VP8 Image Analyzer Presentation - ShroudNM.com," 31 December. [return]
34. Wilson, 1979, p.229; Morgan, 1980, p.132. [return]
35. Wilson, 1979, p.229; Adams, 1982, p.94; Wilson, 1986, p.47; Wilson, 1998, p.28; Antonacci, 2000, p.39. [return]
36. Wilson, 1979, p.229; Morgan, 1980, pp.132-133; Wilson, 1986, p.47; Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, p.34. [return]
37. Adams, 1982, p.94; Adler, 2000a, p.117; Adler, 2000c, p.18. [return]
38. Jackson, et al., 1977, p.80. [return]
39. Jackson, et al., 1977, pp.80-81; Morgan, 1980, p.133. [return]
40. Wilson, 1979, pp.229-230; Adams, 1982, p.94; Maher, R.W., 1986, "Science, History, and the Shroud of Turin," Vantage Press: New York NY, pp.52-53; Antonacci, 2000, p.38; de Wesselow, 2012, p.101. [return]
41. Adams, 1982, p.94. [return]
42. Brooks, E.H., II., Miller, V.D. & Schwortz, B.M., 1981, "The Turin Shroud: Contemporary Insights to an Ancient Paradox," Worldwide Exhibition: Chicago IL, p.22. [return]
43. Adams, 1982, p.94. [return]
44. Adams, 1982, p.94. [return]
45. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1981, "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, p.76K; Weaver, K.F., 1980, "Science Seeks to Solve...The Mystery of the Shroud," National Geographic, Vol. 157, June, pp.730-767, 731. [return]
46. Adams, 1982, p.94; ; Whanger, A.D. & M.W., "Revisiting the Eye Images: What are They?," in Fanti, G., ed., 2009, "The Shroud of Turin: Perspectives on a Multifaceted Enigma," Proceedings of the 2008 Columbus Ohio International Conference, August 14-17, 2008, Progetto Libreria: Padua, Italy, pp.134-139, 135,. [return]
47. Jackson, J.P. & Ercoline, W.R., 1982, "The Three-Dimensional Characteristics of the Shroud Image," IEEE 11982 Proceedings of the International Conference on Cybernetics and Society, October, pp.559-575, 575, in Stevenson & Habermas, 1990, pp.32-33. [return]
48. Jackson, et. al, 1984, "Correlation of image intensity on the Turin Shroud with the 3-D structure of a human body shape," Applied Optics, Vol. 23, No. 14, pp. 2244-2270. [return]
49. Wilson, I., 1985, "Some Recent Publications," BSTS Newsletter, No. 9, January. [return]
50. Diocese of Turin, 2016, "The Holy Shroud: A three dimensional image," 14 November. [return]
51. Moretto, G., 1999, "The Shroud: A Guide," Neame, A., transl., Paulist Press: Mahwah NJ, p.51. [return]
52. Antonacci, 2000, pp.40, 288n9. [return]
53. Tamburelli, G., 1982, "Reading the Holy Shroud, called the Fifth Gospel, with the Aid of the Computer," Shroud Spectrum International, March, pp.3-11, 5. [return]
54. Tamburelli, 1982, p.5. [return]
55. Diocese of Turin, 2016. [return]
56. Jackson, et al., 1977, p.89; Antonacci, 2000, p.102. [return]
57. Jackson, et al., 1977, p.89; Antonacci, 2000, p.102. [return]
58. Jackson, et al., 1977, p.89; Antonacci, 2000, p.102. [return]
59. Jumper, E., Stevenson, K. & Jackson, J., 1978, "Images of Coins on a Burial Cloth?," The Numismatist, July, Vol. 91, No. 7, pp.1349-1357, 1354. [return]
60. Wilson, 1979, p.231; Iannone, 1998, p.35; Whanger, M. & Whanger, A.D., 1998, "The Shroud of Turin: An Adventure of Discovery," Providence House Publishers: Franklin TN, p.24; Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., 1999, "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, p.9; Ruffin, 1999, p.107; Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, p.99; Whanger & Whanger, 2009, pp.135, 138; Oxley, 2010, p.176. [return]
61. Baima Bollone, P., "Images of Extraneous Objects on the Shroud," in Scannerini, S. & Savarino, P., eds, 2000, "The Turin Shroud: Past, Present and Future," International scientific symposium, Turin, 2-5 March 2000," Effatà: Cantalupa, p.133. [return]
62. Jumper, et al, 1978, p.1354. [return]
63. Jumper, et al, 1978, p.1356. [return]
64. Jumper, et al, 1978, p.1356. [return]
65. Adler, A.D., 1999, "The Nature of the Body Images on the Shroud of Turin," in Adler & Crispino, 2002, pp.103-112, 105-106; Adler, 2000a, p.118; Adler, 2000c, p.18. [return]
66. Antonacci, 2000, p.78. [return]
67. Antonacci, 2000, p.73. [return]
68. Antonacci, 2000, p.61. [return]
69. Antonacci, 2000, pp.85-86. [return]
70. Adler, 1999, p.106; Adler, 2000a, p.118; Adler, 2000c, p.18. [return]
71. Jackson, J.P., 1990, "Is the Image on the Shroud Due to a Process Heretofore Unknown to Modern Science?," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 34, March, pp.3-29. [return]
72. Jackson, 1991, p.339. [return]
73. Jackson, 1990, pp.13-14; Jackson, 1991, p.341. [return]
74. Jackson, 1990, p.15. [return]
75. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002: Horizontal" (rotated left 90°), Sindonology.org. [return]
76. Jackson, 1990, p.12. [return]
77. Adams, 1982, p.94; Adler, 2000a, p.118; Adler, 2000c, p.18. [return]
78. Heller, 1983, p.207. [return]
79. Heller, 1983, p.207. [return]
80. Heller, 1983, p.207. [return]
81. Stevenson & Habermas, 1981, p.108. [return]
82. Schumacher, P.M., 1999, "Photogrammetric Responses from the Shroud of Turin," in Walsh, B.J., ed., "Proceedings of the 1999 Shroud of Turin International Research Conference, Richmond, Virginia," Magisterium Press: Glen Allen VA, 2000, pp.30-37, 32-33. [return]
83. Maher, 1986, p.53. [return]
84. Maher, 1986, p.53. [return]
85. Bennett, 2001, p.168. [return]
86. Oxley, 2010, p.244. [return]
87. Martin, R.P., "Philippians: An Introduction and Commentary," The Tyndale New Testament commentaries, [1959], Inter-Varsity Press: Leicester UK, Second Edition, 1987, Reprinted, 2002, pp.165-166. [return]
88. Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, pp.128-129. [return]
89. Rogers, R.N., 1978. Los Alamos Monitor, March 24, in Nickell, J., 1987, "Inquest on the Shroud of Turin," [1983], Prometheus Books: Buffalo NY, Revised, Reprinted, 2000, pp.87-88, 172n9. [return]
90. "Transfiguration of Jesus: Transfiguration and Resurrection," Wikipedia, 10 February 2017. [return]
91. Wilson, 1979, p.250; Morgan, 1980, p.77; Iannone, 2010, p.102; Oxley, 2010, pp.250-251; Ball, P., 2015, "How did the Turin Shroud get its image?," BBC, 19 June. [return]
92. Tosatti, M., 2011, "The Shroud is not a fake," Vatican Insider, 12 December. [return]
93. Ibid. [return]
94. Scheuermann, O., 1986, "Shroud," West Germany, June, in Stevenson & Habermas, 1990, pp.208, 245 n.33. [return]

Posted: 5 February 2017. Updated: 14 March 2017.

10 comments:

Steve Calovich said...

Hi Mr Jones,

I don't know if you ever got the chance to check out Ray Downing's video, "The Real Face of Jesus From the Shroud of Turin". The last ten minutes of the video are interesting. Mr Downing used an ordinary desktop scanner to test his reconstruction of the Holy Face of Jesus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNJPJ4JwHeE

Steve Calovich

Stephen E. Jones said...

Steve

>I don't know if you ever got the chance to check out Ray Downing's video, "The Real Face of Jesus From the Shroud of Turin". The last ten minutes of the video are interesting. Mr Downing used an ordinary desktop scanner to test his reconstruction of the Holy Face of Jesus.
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNJPJ4JwHeE
>
>Steve Calovich

Thanks. From memory I did watch it on YouTube. I will try to find time to watch it again.

Stephen E. Jones
----------------------------------
MY POLICIES. Comments are moderated. Those I consider off-topic, offensive or sub-standard will not appear. Except that comments under my latest post can be on any one Shroud-related topic. To avoid time-wasting debate I normally allow only one comment per individual under each one of my posts.

Anonymous said...

Sorry but there is no mention in the Gospels that coins were placed over Jesus' eyes.

Stephen E. Jones said...

Anonymous

>Sorry but there is no mention in the Gospels that coins were placed over Jesus' eyes.

I nearly rejected your comment as "sub-standard" (see my policies above) because your argument is incomplete.

First, you presumably meant to say: "... therefore the man on the Shroud is not Jesus" (otherwise what would have been your point?).

Second, there is a hidden premise in your argument that is needed to make it work, but if you had stated it, it would have been seen to be obviously false.

The hidden premises in your argument must be: "...and the gospels recorded EVERYTHING that occurred in the burial of Jesus."

So to make logical sense, your complete argument would have to have been: "....there is no mention in the Gospels that coins were placed over Jesus' eyes" and "the gospels recorded everything that occurred in the burial of Jesus, therefore the man on the Shroud is not Jesus."

But this is OBVIOUSLY FALSE. The gospels say ALMOST NOTHING about what occurred in the burial of Jesus:

Mt 27:59-60. "And Joseph [of Arimathea] took the body and wrapped it in a clean linen shroud and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had cut in the rock. And he rolled a great stone to the entrance of the tomb and went away."

Mk 15:46. "And Joseph bought a linen shroud, and taking him down, wrapped him in the linen shroud and laid him in a tomb that had been cut out of the rock. And he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb.

Lk 23:53. "Then he took it down and wrapped it in a linen shroud and laid him in a tomb cut in stone, where no one had ever yet been laid."

Jn 19:40-42. "So they took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen cloths with the spices, as is the burial custom of the Jews. Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb in which no one had yet been laid. So because of the Jewish day of Preparation, since the tomb was close at hand, they laid Jesus there.

[continued]

Stephen E. Jones said...

[continued]

And there is archaeological evidence that it was a first-century "burial custom of the Jews" to place coins over the eyelids of their dead, to keep their eyes from opening:

"The placing of coins or shards over the eyes of the corpse was known among medieval Jews and believed to be an ancient tradition (Bender 1895:101-3) to prevent the eyes from opening before glimpsing the next world ... Recent excavations (Hachlili 1979:34) at Jewish tombs of the 1st century A.D. near Jericho have yielded the first evidence of this practice; two coins (A.D. 41-44) were found inside a skull, undoubtedly having fallen through the eye sockets." (Meacham, W., 1983, "The Authentication of the Turin Shroud: An Issue in Archaeological Epistemology," Current Anthropology, Vol. 24, No. 3, June, pp.283-311, 290).

Stephen E. Jones
----------------------------------
"By way of guidance as to what I mean by `offensive' and `sub-standard,' I regard comments to my blog as analogous to letters to the Editor of a newspaper. If the Editor of a newspaper would not publish a comment because it is `offensive' and/or `sub-standard' then neither will I. It does not mean that if I disagree with a comment I won't publish it. I have published anti-authenticist comments and other comments that I disagreed with, and I have deleted `offensive' and/or `sub-standard' comments that are pro-authenticist. `Sub-standard' includes attempting to use my blog as a platform to publish a block of text of the commenter's own views, and also bare links to other sites with little or no actual comments. By `off-topic' I mean if a comment has little or nothing to do with the topic(s) in the post it is under (except for the latest post-see above)." [05Jan16]

Stephen E. Jones said...

This is my reply to a comment under my 2008 post, "Shroud name index `W'." As I told the commenter, I am replying to it here under my latest post so that more readers will see it.

>Rona Hart said...

>Appreciate that this is a bit late, but I have only just read The Turin Shroud by Ian Wilson, having come across it in a second hand book shop.

That is a good place to start! It was the second Shroud book that I read. I regard it as the best Shroud book ever written. A year later, in 1979, Wilson published a revision of it, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, which included Max Frei's pollen research.

>Would just like to make one point. Wilson relates the story of the woman who wipes Jesus' face with her veil; the cloth then reveals 'the true image' ("Veronica")of Jesus' face.

As you may know, but may not because Wilson in the book does not fully explain it, and what he does explain is in an endnote:

"1011 A copy of the Mandylion is brought to Rome about this time, where an altar is consecrated to it by Pope Sergius. This copy becomes subsequently known as the Veronica (from vera icon - "true likeness"). In the course of time the legend of the woman Veronica develops from this and development of the Hemorrhissa story." (Wilson, I., 1978, "The Turin Shroud," Book Club Associates: London, p.218).

But what Wilson does not explain is that the name "Veronica" is a combination of a a Latin and a Greek word, vera Latin = "true" + and eikon Greek = "image" or "likeness":

"As proven by a medieval text, `Veronica' was used by the 13th century as a designation for a relic venerated in Rome as the true image of Jesus. Since the Latin word for `true' or `authentic' happens to be vera, the theory emerged that the name itself is derived from the Latin phrase `true image', vera icon (one Latin word for image is icon, derived from Greek: εικόνα, eikona).("Saint Veronica," Wikipedia, 24 January 2017)

And according to my "Collins Latin-English Dictionary," there is no Latin word "icon" in the Latin section. And under "icon" in the English section it has Latin "simulacrum."

This itself is strange and may indicate that the name goes back before Greek and Latin, namely Aramaic or Hebrew, as you suggest below.

[continued]

Stephen E. Jones said...

[continued]

>Jesus is reported to have said: All honour to you, courageous woman.

"Veronica was in her house when she heard the shouting and wailing from a crowd surrounding the soldiers who were leading Jesus to Calvary. She rose hurriedly, put her head to the door, looked over the heads of the crowd, and saw our Redeemer ... Transported, beside herself, she seized her veil and threw herself into the street, oblivious to the insults and blows from the soldiers who pushed her back. Arriving in the presence of our Savior, whose face was pouring with sweat and blood, she wiped [his face] with her veil ... All honor to you, courageous woman ... The Savior granted you the most precious gift which he could make to a creature of this world, his portrait imprinted ... on your veil." (Wilson, 1978, p.87).

>This may sound somewhat flowery in English, but the phrase 'all honour to you' is a regular expression in Hebrew (don't know about Aramaic) and is often used in the sense of 'good for you', or 'well done'. Similarly, the words courageous woman, recall another well known expression in Hebrew - eshet chayil. These are the first words in the famous lines in Proverbs, where the phrase is usually translated as 'a woman of worth' but could perhaps more readily be translated as woman of courage.

Presumably that is Proverbs 31:10, "An excellent wife who can find? She is far more precious than jewels."

See "Eshet Chayil - Hebrew for Christians"

Coming up for my 45th wedding anniversary, I can vouch for that!

>Although, as Wilson notes, the story doesn't come from the New Testament, and is thought of as a myth, I found it very interesting that the reported speech would translate back to Hebrew so readily.

I am a bit hazy on the Veronica story, but if the greeting "All honour to you, courageous woman" is not medieval European, and the fact that vera eikon is a Latin-Greek compound, it may be evidence that the Veronica story originated in the very early church, when it was still predominantly Aramaic-speaking. If so, it would be a contemporary parallel to the Abgar V story of Jesus wiping his face on a towel, to explain how Jesus image came to be on the Image of Edessa (the Shroud tetradiplon = "four-doubled").

I will draw your comment and this my reply to the attention of Ian Wilson, to see if he thinks it as significant as I do. I will post his reply (if any) here as a comment, or even as a separate post if Wilson does think it is significant.

Stephen E. Jones

Stephen E. Jones said...

Rona

>I will draw your comment and this my reply to the attention of Ian Wilson, to see if he thinks it as significant as I do. I will post his reply (if any) here as a comment, or even as a separate post if Wilson does think it is significant

Ian Wilson has replied by email today, but doesn't want to be quoted, so I will put what he wrote in my own words as far as possible:

1) "All honor to you, courageous woman" being Hebraic. Ian had not previously heard of this and he regards it as an interesting point, for which he asked me to thank you.

2) The word "icon" not being in my Collins Latin-English Dictionary. Ian pointed out that it is in his more academic Latin-English Dictionary. But he did agree that it was a loan word from Greek, unlike vera.

Which however confirms my point that "Veronica" being a compound Latin-Greek word is, together with the Hebraic greeting, evidence that the 11th century Veronica story of Jesus imprinting the image of His face on a woman's veil, which is traditionally linked to the gospel accounts of Jesus' healing the woman with a 12-year flow of blood [Gk haimorroousa] (Mt 9:20-22; Mk 5:25-34; Lk 8:43-48), originated in the earliest Aramaic/Hebrew-speaking church and so is contemporary with, or even earlier than, the story of Jesus imprinting the image of His face on the towel of Abgar V's servant Ananias.

The bottom line is that unless "All honor to you, courageous woman" can be shown to be a normal medieval European greeting, the fact that, according to you, whom I presume are Hebrew-speaking, it translates readily back into a standard Hebrew greeting, it must be a `linguistic fossil' from the earliest Jewish-Christian church.

An example of which is the Aramaic word, "Maranatha" in 1Cor 16:22 (KJV). Of which one of my commentaries notes:

"22. Paul ... follows with the Aramaic Maranatha (which NIV translates Come, O Lord!). Being Aramaic, the expression cannot have originated among the Greeks, but must go back to the early days of the church in Palestine." (Morris, L.L., 1985, "The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians," Inter-Varsity Press: Leicester UK, Second edition, Reprinted, 1987, p.243. My emphasis).

Stephen E. Jones
---------------------------------
Reader, if you like this my The Shroud of Turin blog, and you have a website, could you please consider adding a hyperlink to my blog on it? This would help increase its Google PageRank number and so enable those who are Google searching on "the Shroud of Turin" to more readily discover my blog. Thanks.

Rona Hart said...

Thanks, Stephen, for considering my comments and including them in your blog. Sorry for belated response but had problems with email account - yours was the last comment included in it before it closed, and the first one I found when I had access! Kind regards, Rona

Stephen E. Jones said...

Rona

>Thanks, Stephen, for considering my comments and including them in your blog.

Thank you for bringing to my attention that the Veronica story may have originated in the earliest Aramaic/Hebrew-speaking era, i.e. 1st century, of the Christian church.

When I get to that part of my "Chronology of the Turin Shroud," i.e. "Eleventh century" (1011) I will refer to your linguistic evidence.

>Sorry for belated response but had problems with email account - yours was the last comment included in it before it closed, and the first one I found when I had access!

No need to apologise.

>Kind regards, Rona

And to you.

Stephen E. Jones